Pentax K10D reviewed by DPReview.com -- interesting camera

[AndrewR]

Here's the review.

The feature set is definitely fantastic, and I like some of the unique things it has, like the new shooting modes, the RAW button, and the flexible Auto ISO, but I am dismayed by the image quality issues that the review mentions.

What I found interesting was the comparison with the Sony, which has incredible sharpness yet the Pentax seems (didn't look at full size pics) to suffer from similar noise problems.

Nevertheless, at the price it's offered, it's a very nice camera. It's not good enough to make me dump my lens lineup, but I'm REALLY hoping it kicks Sony into producing a better model to compete against it.

 

[Kelvrick]

Originally posted by: AndrewR
Here's the review.

The feature set is definitely fantastic, and I like some of the unique things it has, like the new shooting modes, the RAW button, and the flexible Auto ISO, but I am dismayed by the image quality issues that the review mentions.

What I found interesting was the comparison with the Sony, which has incredible sharpness yet the Pentax seems (didn't look at full size pics) to suffer from similar noise problems.

Nevertheless, at the price it's offered, it's a very nice camera. It's not good enough to make me dump my lens lineup, but I'm REALLY hoping it kicks Sony into producing a better model to compete against it.

I think the Sony is an awesome camera if it'd only come with 2 dials.

 

[yhelothar]

It's surprising the K10D would still have image quality problems after it was largely criticized for it in the istDS. However, like the istDS, the problems may only show up in the bright tone setting. The istDS had perfect JPGs in the natural tone, which dpreview failed to note on their review.
Thus, I wouldn't give up hope for the K10D based on dpreview's findings.
istDS jpg comparison

 

[GTaudiophile]

Darn. I really wanted this camera to be a homerun!

ISO performance is poor. And its image quality simply cannot stack up to the D80 or 30D.

 

[randomlinh]

IQ with jpeg shooting looks terrible in comparison to those guys. But it doesn't seem to fall THAT far behind in raw. altho, oddly, I somewhat want to switch to a D80. cheaper than getting a 30D (if going new). I just am not familiar w/ nikon's lens lineup enough. I'm just sick of the tiny viewfinder in my rebel mostly.

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: Kelvrick

Originally posted by: AndrewR
Here's the review.

The feature set is definitely fantastic, and I like some of the unique things it has, like the new shooting modes, the RAW button, and the flexible Auto ISO, but I am dismayed by the image quality issues that the review mentions.

What I found interesting was the comparison with the Sony, which has incredible sharpness yet the Pentax seems (didn't look at full size pics) to suffer from similar noise problems.

Nevertheless, at the price it's offered, it's a very nice camera. It's not good enough to make me dump my lens lineup, but I'm REALLY hoping it kicks Sony into producing a better model to compete against it.

I think the Sony is an awesome camera if it'd only come with 2 dials.

I've fondled it a few times in stores, and it is a very impressive camera. The predictive eye focus, or whatever they call it (focuses when you put your eye to the eyepiece), seems pretty useful and is apparently a Minolta feature from their film days.

The 2 dials thing is the differentiation between the Maxxum 5D and 7D, which has two dials and a slew of buttons. The hope is that the next Sony will replace the 7D and inherit its ergonomics as well which are unmatched in any camera I've seen (my experience with Canikon pros is limited).

It's surprising the K10D would still have image quality problems after it was largely criticized for it in the istDS.

What's odd is that the IQ problems they found are NOT present in the K100D. It might be a function of the sensor in some way because it seems to be something new. I'm waiting for the Imaging Resource review since they always put up pretty exhaustive reviews. Steve's Digicams is probably reviewing it soon as well, though I don't prefer his reviews for the most part (though he tends to review the most models of anyone -- probably a related fact!).

Maybe some of the problems can be fixed in firmware, but some of it might be hard wired into the image processor, unfortunately. Pentax does deserve a fair amount of praise for their effort though. It's always good to see a camera come out with innovations, rather than crippled features like Canon seems to love (no spot metering, etc.).

 

[tfinch2]

Phil's Canon bias is getting too ridiculous to like dpreview anymore. IQ does not deserve a 7.5. High ISO is overrated, and you're a tool if you don't use RAW. Pentax scores better than other dslrs, but it is highly recommended just barely.

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: tfinch2
Phil's Canon bias is getting too ridiculous to like dpreview anymore. IQ does not deserve a 7.5. High ISO is overrated, and you're a tool if you don't use RAW. Pentax scores better than other dslrs, but it is highly recommended just barely.

I find the high ISO thing amusing. My 7D does fairly well at higher ISOs, but I can count the number of times I've shot ISO 1600, let alone 3200, on one hand. Certainly, there are certain people who need high ISO for the pictures they prefer to take. I'm not one of them, and I can't see that everyone else is. High ISO might be clean, but it's also more blurry from the NR.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: randomlinh
IQ with jpeg shooting looks terrible in comparison to those guys. But it doesn't seem to fall THAT far behind in raw. altho, oddly, I somewhat want to switch to a D80. cheaper than getting a 30D (if going new). I just am not familiar w/ nikon's lens lineup enough. I'm just sick of the tiny viewfinder in my rebel mostly.

I picked up my 30D for $939 after the double rebate from B&H Photo a couple months ago.

BTW-I read through the review on that site and it didn't look like the image quality was THAT bad. It was definitely due to the in camera processing as the RAW files could be cleaned up by the photographer to look as good as the Canon or Nikon images. Still, it would be nice to not have to process every image out of the camera just to get the quality you want. Not to mention the RAW image files took up about 10MB each (maybe RAW + jpeg? I don't remember).

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Originally posted by: tfinch2
Phil's Canon bias is getting too ridiculous to like dpreview anymore. IQ does not deserve a 7.5. High ISO is overrated, and you're a tool if you don't use RAW. Pentax scores better than other dslrs, but it is highly recommended just barely.

Yeah, the "just barely" thing made me roll my eyes. His main gripe seemed to be the "slightly soft image processing," which is easily fixable in your RAW software or Photoshop.

Crop for crop the K10D actually delivers about the same amount of detail as the D80, the biggest difference is down to the crispness of edge detail which appears softer in the K10D image than the D80. As we speculated earlier this would appear to be down to the type of demosaicing / sharpening algorithms used as the actual detailed delivered by the CCD is higher and can be extracted fully by shooting RAW.

As long as the detail is still in the pictures and can be brought out using RAW, I don't care if the pictures straight from the camera are soft. I sharpen 100% of my pictures and shoot 100% RAW, which are the two things that people who buy this camera SHOULD be doing anyway... the fact that the images straight out of the camera lack sharpening should be a very minor issue.

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
I picked up my 30D for $939 after the double rebate from B&H Photo a couple months ago.

I purposely didn't factor in the rebate, as it's not really a constant. It's nice to see some stiff competition though. Hopefully we'll see pricing slowly trickle downward.

Actually, does anyone have any input on the lens lineup pentax has? That would be my only concern I think. It's just so much easier to find used stuff for the big guys though.

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

Originally posted by: tfinch2
Phil's Canon bias is getting too ridiculous to like dpreview anymore. IQ does not deserve a 7.5. High ISO is overrated, and you're a tool if you don't use RAW. Pentax scores better than other dslrs, but it is highly recommended just barely.

Yeah, the "just barely" thing made me roll my eyes. His main gripe seemed to be the "slightly soft image processing," which is easily fixable in your RAW software or Photoshop.

Crop for crop the K10D actually delivers about the same amount of detail as the D80, the biggest difference is down to the crispness of edge detail which appears softer in the K10D image than the D80. As we speculated earlier this would appear to be down to the type of demosaicing / sharpening algorithms used as the actual detailed delivered by the CCD is higher and can be extracted fully by shooting RAW.

As long as the detail is still in the pictures and can be brought out using RAW, I don't care if the pictures straight from the camera are soft. I sharpen 100% of my pictures and shoot 100% RAW, which are the two things that people who buy this camera SHOULD be doing anyway... the fact that the images straight out of the camera lack sharpening should be a very minor issue.

I'll have to disagree with you. I shoot RAW most of the time, but sometimes I just want good quality JPEGs without monkeying with any post-processing (ie., I won't be making high quality prints with them). I think there are probably more people like me than people like you who shoot exclusively in RAW (well, and most people who don't shoot as well as you either!). The fact that the K10D screws itself in the in-camera processing is a problem but a very stupid one by Pentax. The camera is capable of excellent photos, but they messed it up. It's a shame.

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: randomlinh

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
I picked up my 30D for $939 after the double rebate from B&H Photo a couple months ago.

I purposely didn't factor in the rebate, as it's not really a constant. It's nice to see some stiff competition though. Hopefully we'll see pricing slowly trickle downward.

Actually, does anyone have any input on the lens lineup pentax has? That would be my only concern I think. It's just so much easier to find used stuff for the big guys though.

You'd be surprised, especially with Pentax. Though I have no direct experience, I can relate it to my experience with Minolta, since their mount goes back to the mid-80s, and Pentax goes back even further (for which they should be HIGHLY COMMENDED!). The Maxxum mount has been around for so long that there are many, many, many lenses out there that will fit my Maxxum 7D though they were made for film.

I have 7 main lenses for my camera, and only three of them were made within the last several years. The most expensive was purchased with the camera and is around $350 (28-75mm f/2.8 D). The other modern lens was $60 -- the 18-70mm kit lens. The last one was a cheapie Sigma (28-105mm f/3.5-5.6) that I bought for $30.

Of the other four, the most expensive was $150 for a 70-210mm f/4 which rivals Canon's professional glass. I also have a 50mm f/1.7 (was around $50, now closer to $100 since the Alpha came out) and a very high quality 75-300mm f/3.5-5.6 ($110). I bought an older Sigma 75-300mm f/3.5-5.6 for $40 with another lens and a film body!

Basically, these older lenses are everywhere, and many people don't realize that they still work on modern cameras (or, they do but don't care). You can find them for next to nothing in comparison to the new stuff, and very often you're going to get better build quality though perhaps without some of the newer camera-lens communication you get nowadays. Heck, if the glass is top notch, use manual focus and get stunning pictures. The viewer never knows.

 

[foghorn67]

Originally posted by: tfinch2
Phil's Canon bias is getting too ridiculous to like dpreview anymore. IQ does not deserve a 7.5. High ISO is overrated, and you're a tool if you don't use RAW. Pentax scores better than other dslrs, but it is highly recommended just barely.

Tell all the SI photographers they are tools. :roll:

 

[Mrvile]

I would already own this camera if it weren't for its lack of lens selection and third-party support...

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Mrvile
I would already own this camera if it weren't for its lack of lens selection and third-party support...

there are quite a few 3rd party lenses in pentax mount over at sigma4less.com

 

[yhelothar]

Originally posted by: randomlinh
IQ with jpeg shooting looks terrible in comparison to those guys. But it doesn't seem to fall THAT far behind in raw. altho, oddly, I somewhat want to switch to a D80. cheaper than getting a 30D (if going new). I just am not familiar w/ nikon's lens lineup enough. I'm just sick of the tiny viewfinder in my rebel mostly.

JPG looks terrible, but the raw looks better than the D80 to me.

 

[yhelothar]

Originally posted by: Mrvile
I would already own this camera if it weren't for its lack of lens selection and third-party support...

So what lens are you looking for that Pentax doesn't provide?

 

[tfinch2]

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: tfinch2
Phil's Canon bias is getting too ridiculous to like dpreview anymore. IQ does not deserve a 7.5. High ISO is overrated, and you're a tool if you don't use RAW. Pentax scores better than other dslrs, but it is highly recommended just barely.

Tell all the SI photographers they are tools. :roll:

LOL, you're comparing the Canon bias of Phil to everything like toothbrushes that carries the Canon name, to the 1D/5D series bodies + L glass bias of pro photogs.

 

[tfinch2]

Originally posted by: Mrvile
I would already own this camera if it weren't for its lack of lens selection and third-party support...

Oh god not this again.

Educate yourself.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: tfinch2

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: tfinch2
Phil's Canon bias is getting too ridiculous to like dpreview anymore. IQ does not deserve a 7.5. High ISO is overrated, and you're a tool if you don't use RAW. Pentax scores better than other dslrs, but it is highly recommended just barely.

Tell all the SI photographers they are tools. :roll:

LOL, you're comparing the Canon bias of Phil to everything like toothbrushes that carries the Canon name, to the 1D/5D series bodies + L glass bias of pro photogs.

Canon makes toothbrushes?

What's wrong with Canon L lenses?

 

[tfinch2]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: tfinch2

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: tfinch2
Phil's Canon bias is getting too ridiculous to like dpreview anymore. IQ does not deserve a 7.5. High ISO is overrated, and you're a tool if you don't use RAW. Pentax scores better than other dslrs, but it is highly recommended just barely.

Tell all the SI photographers they are tools. :roll:

LOL, you're comparing the Canon bias of Phil to everything like toothbrushes that carries the Canon name, to the 1D/5D series bodies + L glass bias of pro photogs.

Canon makes toothbrushes?

What's wrong with Canon L lenses?

I never said there was anything wrong with L lenses. Bias toward's Canon's pro lineup is warranted. A little extreme, but warranted.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: tfinch2

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: tfinch2

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: tfinch2
Phil's Canon bias is getting too ridiculous to like dpreview anymore. IQ does not deserve a 7.5. High ISO is overrated, and you're a tool if you don't use RAW. Pentax scores better than other dslrs, but it is highly recommended just barely.

Tell all the SI photographers they are tools. :roll:

LOL, you're comparing the Canon bias of Phil to everything like toothbrushes that carries the Canon name, to the 1D/5D series bodies + L glass bias of pro photogs.

Canon makes toothbrushes?

What's wrong with Canon L lenses?

I never said there was anything wrong with L lenses. Bias toward's Canon's pro lineup is warranted. A little extreme, but warranted.

Fair enough.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

Originally posted by: tfinch2
Phil's Canon bias is getting too ridiculous to like dpreview anymore. IQ does not deserve a 7.5. High ISO is overrated, and you're a tool if you don't use RAW. Pentax scores better than other dslrs, but it is highly recommended just barely.

Yeah, the "just barely" thing made me roll my eyes. His main gripe seemed to be the "slightly soft image processing," which is easily fixable in your RAW software or Photoshop.

Crop for crop the K10D actually delivers about the same amount of detail as the D80, the biggest difference is down to the crispness of edge detail which appears softer in the K10D image than the D80. As we speculated earlier this would appear to be down to the type of demosaicing / sharpening algorithms used as the actual detailed delivered by the CCD is higher and can be extracted fully by shooting RAW.

As long as the detail is still in the pictures and can be brought out using RAW, I don't care if the pictures straight from the camera are soft. I sharpen 100% of my pictures and shoot 100% RAW, which are the two things that people who buy this camera SHOULD be doing anyway... the fact that the images straight out of the camera lack sharpening should be a very minor issue.

I'll have to disagree with you. I shoot RAW most of the time, but sometimes I just want good quality JPEGs without monkeying with any post-processing (ie., I won't be making high quality prints with them). I think there are probably more people like me than people like you who shoot exclusively in RAW (well, and most people who don't shoot as well as you either!). The fact that the K10D screws itself in the in-camera processing is a problem but a very stupid one by Pentax. The camera is capable of excellent photos, but they messed it up. It's a shame.

That's true. It's always really depression to see a camera come so close to being awesome but then implement something wrongly.

As for RAW, I actually shoot RAW+JPEG. For me, the only point for the JPEGs to exist is so I can easily go through a folder full of shots in Windows Explorer. Since the JPEGs accompany the RAWs, when I see a JPEG that I like, I edit the RAW. Even when I'm going doing whatever shots, I still shoot RAW. I dunno, I guess I'm weird like that.

 

[FilmCamera]

Originally posted by: tfinch2
Phil's Canon bias is getting too ridiculous to like dpreview anymore. IQ does not deserve a 7.5. High ISO is overrated, and you're a tool if you don't use RAW. Pentax scores better than other dslrs, but it is highly recommended just barely.

High ISO is not overrated if you are a wedding photographer. Or if you do any shooting in a very dark environment. I have had to shoot in dimly lit churches where the church does not allow any flash. High ISO and a fast lens is the only thing that will save you in that circumstance.